The need for America to cut it’s carbon footprint by 50% in the next decade under biden’s plan has been attacked to absurd proportions.
Republicans have been arguing against doing something about climate change for decades. It should therefore be borne in mind that the speed of cuts necessary now has been made necessary by previous republican governments. Now this has to be remembered that this did not come from something Biden said, and in there more honest moments some republicans will admit this, unfortunately for the time being though it is clear that the noisy republicans are all in with this fake attack.
To be clear, 4 pounds of meat annually did not come from the biden administration. This number has been taken from a paper by the Michigan university, that is more than 10-years old. This paper suggests that by reducing our meeting take by 90% this could help us meet the target. The point obviously that it misses, is that cuts of 50% do not require a 90% reduction in the cabin released from our diet. This is a choice – the American people can choose how to cut their carbon footprint. As I argue below, cuts of 50% are potentially manageable without changing people’s diet. Now it is certainly true that many health experts suggest Americans eat too much meat, however another thing been discussed recently is how adding a small quantity of a specific type of seaweed into cattles diet could reduce their carbon emissions dramatically – potentially giving us the emission reductions we need without changing my diet at all.
Having said that this argument that this plan will eradicate the ability for Americans to enjoy red meat is absurd. What is ridiculous is republicans have decided what this plan means and then ridiculed the result – this is unfortunately a regular tactic undertaken by people who have no grounds to argue.
It generally falls into three categories
- Inaccurately state the decision made
- Draw some ridiculous conclusion from your original inaccurate statement
- Work up a hysteria against your ridiculous conclusion
One of the most important points to make is that the current average carbon emissions of an American citizen is 13.9 tons a year (2020 total USA emissions were 4571 million tons with 328 million people). 7 tons a year per person still allowed significant quantities of meat to be consumed.
If if Americans decarbonised power generation completely in the next 10 years they would already be halfway there. Extremely generous subsidies and governmental support could lead to solar panels being installed on many buildings in America. Many states are already heading in the right direction fast. There is no need to continue to dig coal out of the ground and burn it for electricity, indeed holding this is likely to save Americans money not cost it extra. Transportation accounts for 14% of America’s emissions, but with rapid electrification much of this could be removed. Industry currently accounts for 21% of the countries emissions, and there are many moves that could be made to reduce this dramatically.
One interesting possibility has been floated recently – it has been discovered that by adding a small quantity of certain kinds of seaweed to cattle diet can reduce their methane emissions dramatically. If this was carried out, even with no reduction in meat eating carbon emissions from our diets could be cut dramatically.
Republicans also seem to forget that climate change mitigation is not something merely done for other countries: analysis shows that only two other countries in the world will suffer more expensive damage as a result of climate change than the USA. There opposition is clearly for opposition sake – there is no reasoning behind there are opposition apart from trying to block the plan put forwards – a foolish move not least because much of its can be put into place despite their opposition, guaranteeing any success will be credited solely to the democrats.
In summary the republicans opposition is foolish on many levels. Their own intransigence has required this rapid change, if acted on carefully this target could require very little changing habits and the variety of industries that would need to grow up to allow this change with more than make up for the few jobs that must cease to exist. There is much legitimate discussion to be had as the how to meet this climate emergency – however until republicans admit the truth and come to the table honestly it seems unlikely we’re going to see anything sensible, as alternative to watch biden is putting forwards.
Important note: this blog is primarily about wildlife, however until America admits the threat that global warming causes for the world and all its ecosystems, American politics on this front is something we all need to become far too familiar with. For readers in the UK, it is an alarmingly true fact that some members on the far-right the conservative party, and other politicians like Nigel Farage make similar arguments. Thankfully at the moment more sensible heads prevail in the UK however we can’t rely on this being the case forever.